Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad? - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-26-2006, 10:44 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 344
                     
Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

This isn't really meant to be a belligerant discussion question...just a question that hopefully someone can answer well. Obviously, its nice to have multiple weapons of attack, but why is it necessarily bad to have just one weapon? I mean, if the weapon is really good, then you can do well, correct? Imagine if roddick's (95% of "one-dimensional" referred to him before Fed's comment) serve was 300 mph (or 500 kph or w/e)...that being his only dimension wouldn't be a problem, would it? It seems like the term "one-dimensional" is tossed around so that if you are one dimensional, then that dimension WILL get figured out by EVERYONE on tour, so you will be fucked down the road, guaranteed. Am I understanding its usage correctly, or just missing something?
Jairus is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-26-2006, 10:46 PM
Registered User
 
betterthanhenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,952
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Karlovic is the only truly one-dimensional player that springs to mind. That said, compared to Roddick, Ivo is positively Edberg-like at the net

"My greatest point is my persistence. I never give up in a match. However down I am, I fight until the last ball. My list of matches shows that I have turned a great many so-called irretrievable defeats into victories."

Bjorn Borg

Roland Garros, France
Grand Slam, 29-May-78



R128 Deblicker, Eric (FRA) N/A 6-1 6-1 6-1
R64 Fagel, Rick (USA) N/A 6-0 6-1 6-0
R32 Bertolucci, Paolo (ITA) N/A 6-0 6-2 6-2
R16 Tanner, Roscoe (USA) N/A 6-2 6-4 7-6
Q Ramirez, Raul (MEX) N/A 6-3 6-3 6-0
S Barazzutti, Corrado (ITA) N/A 6-0 6-1 6-0
W Vilas, Guillermo (ARG) N/A 6-1 6-1 6-3
betterthanhenman is offline  
post #3 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-26-2006, 10:46 PM
Registered User
 
Rogiman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 9,484
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Oh, come on, you can not be serious....
Rogiman is offline  
post #4 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-26-2006, 10:47 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 344
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

I can see why its worse than multi-dimensional, but not why its objectively bad.

ie. having a bad serve I'd consider objectively bad. Having a poor drop shot is objective worse than having a good drop shot, but I wouldn't consider it something that causes a player to be "bad." Its a fine line, but one that seems drawable...I'm looking for reasons why being one-dimensional is necessarily enough to make a player bad.
Jairus is offline  
post #5 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 12:14 AM
Registered User
 
flyguydsl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 26
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

A lot of great players are "one-dimensional". It's more interesting to note that the "one dimension" of Nadal (whom I believe is the underlying subject here) is that of a defensive game whereas other "one dimensional" players are all aggression and bang bang bang. Maybe that's what throws off the big Fed.
flyguydsl is offline  
post #6 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 12:57 AM
Registered User
 
rofe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,789
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyguydsl
A lot of great players are "one-dimensional". It's more interesting to note that the "one dimension" of Nadal (whom I believe is the underlying subject here) is that of a defensive game whereas other "one dimensional" players are all aggression and bang bang bang. Maybe that's what throws off the big Fed.
Actually, if you really want to qualify Nadal's game as one-dimensional, that one dimension is his superb consistency. His level of play rarely drops and that is a big part of why he wins.

Need ideas for a new signature...
rofe is offline  
post #7 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:01 AM
Registered User
 
Sjengster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Somewhere fairly shingly
Age: 31
Posts: 11,359
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

As you say, it all depends what that dimension is, although since a 300mph serve isn't within the bounds of possibility on a tennis court that's not really worth including. Plenty of great players in the past have had a one-dimensional game, but that dimension can be very difficult to counter. Of course, it's arguable that within a single style there are many variations that make a player multi-faceted; Nadal is bracketed under "consistent baseliner", with a defensive connotation, but anyone who saw that backhand winner he hit to break for 5-3 in the third in the MC final will know that he can be aggressive when the scoreline demands it. The thinking of some seasoned tennis journalists that only serve-volleyers can be defined as aggressive players is ludicrous, look at Calleri or Gonzalez. I suppose back in tennis' heyday, with smaller racquets and quicker courts, most baseliners had to be defensive counter-punchers reacting to the netrusher rather than big hitters.

The Wit and Wisdom of the Tennis Journalist, Indian Wells 2004

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I remember this one time when I went on a vacation on the Maldives. That was in the year 2001, I think. I went to this spa. I went to walk around with my girlfriend. I walk in, and we want to book a spa. This guy goes, "AHH, I remember you. You beat Sampras. I saw you on TV." That was like, really, how can you remember me? This guy has probably never been off his island and still knows me. I was a little bit shocked. Then I went to play tennis with him because he was actually the tennis teacher. It was nice.

Q. Were you naked at the time in the spa?

ROGER FEDERER: No. It was at the front desk. I didn't walk in naked.
Sjengster is offline  
post #8 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:10 AM
Vamos Mandy :)
 
Deboogle!.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Looking for Andy's forehand with Sarah and Re...
Posts: 85,829
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

it's so subjective, it all depends on how one defines a "dimension" - is speed a dimension? mental strength? heart? fight? desire? attitude? Someone like Hewitt doesn't particularly have a "weapon" but he's hardly someone I'd consider "one-dimensional" - even Karlovic can serve AND volley. Is "dimension" synonymous with "weapon"?

Is there a truly one-dimensional player in the whole top 100? someone who really can only do ONE and ONLY one thing well? Is that the criteria? Or is it that they always play one style of game? Is gonzalez one-dimensional b/c all he does is hit the ball hard no matter what he's doing (serving, returning, rallying, etc) - but yet because he's got a good serve, returns well, and overall pretty good groundies, I'd never consider him "one-dimensional" even though he has one style of play and only one.

So in conclusion I think it's entirely subjective.. people who just need to put down a player b/c they don't like him will just slap on a "one-dimensional" label on him so they don't have to actually say anything intelligent And they will give it a bad connontation, but no I do not think it's necessarily a bad thing.

LA Pics & Reports ~ My New Blog: Adventures of a Picky Foodie! ~ My Travel Blog

to (in no particular order): BryOns | Mandy | MarTy | Isner | Dent | Querrey | Baghdatis | Delic | Oli | N&o | Gasquet | Ferrero | Levine | Malisse | LUX | Melzer | Moya | Nishikori | Haas | Grosjean | Ancic | Mathieu | Calleri | Bolelli | Sela | Blake | more...
Deboogle!. is offline  
post #9 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:11 AM
Registered User
 
Sjengster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Somewhere fairly shingly
Age: 31
Posts: 11,359
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Gonzo has good touch when he cares to use it, moreover.

The Wit and Wisdom of the Tennis Journalist, Indian Wells 2004

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah, I remember this one time when I went on a vacation on the Maldives. That was in the year 2001, I think. I went to this spa. I went to walk around with my girlfriend. I walk in, and we want to book a spa. This guy goes, "AHH, I remember you. You beat Sampras. I saw you on TV." That was like, really, how can you remember me? This guy has probably never been off his island and still knows me. I was a little bit shocked. Then I went to play tennis with him because he was actually the tennis teacher. It was nice.

Q. Were you naked at the time in the spa?

ROGER FEDERER: No. It was at the front desk. I didn't walk in naked.
Sjengster is offline  
post #10 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:12 AM
Vamos Mandy :)
 
Deboogle!.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Looking for Andy's forehand with Sarah and Re...
Posts: 85,829
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sjengster
Gonzo has good touch when he cares to use it, moreover.
Sure, and so do many other players who've been labeled "brainless bashers" - I guess that was my point, that I don't think you can make even the top 100 if you are *truly* one-dimensional.

LA Pics & Reports ~ My New Blog: Adventures of a Picky Foodie! ~ My Travel Blog

to (in no particular order): BryOns | Mandy | MarTy | Isner | Dent | Querrey | Baghdatis | Delic | Oli | N&o | Gasquet | Ferrero | Levine | Malisse | LUX | Melzer | Moya | Nishikori | Haas | Grosjean | Ancic | Mathieu | Calleri | Bolelli | Sela | Blake | more...
Deboogle!. is offline  
post #11 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:40 AM
Registered User
 
federated's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Age: 40
Posts: 1,566
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rofe
Actually, if you really want to qualify Nadal's game as one-dimensional, that one dimension is his superb consistency. His level of play rarely drops and that is a big part of why he wins.
hear hear. Rafa fights for every point and has such great focus.

Team Rafa or Team Roger? Team Nole or Team Berdych? Declare Yourself Now!


Federer is not from our planet. He is beyond anything you could even dream about. -Nick Bollettieri


FEDERER*NADAL*LOPEZ*GASQUET*SODERLING*NALBANDIAN
federated is offline  
post #12 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 01:44 AM
Banned!
 
heya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,580
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

If they have poor footwork and bad stamina, and they're still able to improve every year on mixing up and adding dropshots, lobs and a net game....are they truly one dimensional idiots? Not anyone like Federer, clearly.
heya is offline  
post #13 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 02:10 AM
Registered User
 
morningglory's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,579
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

it isn't. ask Monica Seles
morningglory is offline  
post #14 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 04:17 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 344
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyguydsl
A lot of great players are "one-dimensional". It's more interesting to note that the "one dimension" of Nadal (whom I believe is the underlying subject here) is that of a defensive game whereas other "one dimensional" players are all aggression and bang bang bang. Maybe that's what throws off the big Fed.
Interestingly, I wasn't going for Nadal at all. I'm definitely in the Fed camp in this battle, but I wouldn't really call Nadal one-dimensional. Which leads me to...
I guess I would consider one-dimensionality to be a state where one skill is signifincatly better than another. It is not so much having a strategy that is problematic. I think Fed is truly unusual b/c he isn't just multi-dimensional, he also has multiple strategies, possibly deriving from his breath in skills. Contrast this to Agassi who has a very rigid approach, but a wide range of skills still (he's quite good at net and drop shoting, when he chooses to use those talents). Thats why I don't really consider it to be a negative label. Glad to see some people (seem to?) agree. I'm unsure of how I would consider something like Hewitt's drive as a dimension, possibly his dominant dimension, but I think thats oversimplying how his psychology plays a factor in his results.
Jairus is offline  
post #15 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-27-2006, 06:58 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,627
                     
Re: Why is "One-Dimensional" Bad?

To answer the question- because an opponent knows what to expect and has a great opportunity to adjust.

If someone constantly mixes spins, pace; slices, stays back, comes in, hits drop shot, has a great variety on serve and can hit every corner in the box, its very hard to concentrate on your own game and execute the shots because it breaks your rhythm are forces to guess all the time.

But it's the theory. In reality an O-d player can have a big serve that nobody can return, or a hard, flat fh. In other words, you know what to expect but you can't deal with this kind of game. On the other hand, a M-d player might have the ability to hit every shot in the book and not in the book, but has no weapons. This player will not be successful on the ATP tour.
ExpectedWinner is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome